Disaggregating Corruption: A Comparison of Participation and Perceptions in Latin America with a Focus on Mexico1

An abundant empirical literature on corruption relying on survey research has emerged since the mid‐1990s. The predominant line of inquiry concerns perceptions of corruption with respect to institutions and processes. Another, separate line of inquiry that has enjoyed less attention concerns reports about individuals’ participation in corruption. These two dimensions of corruption, however, are typically conflated, leading to error and confusion. This article explores the relationship between the two and seeks to differentiate the two. Using data at the country and individual levels, analysis shows how the two may be only weakly related to one another – though causality remains unclear – and respond to distinct sets of determinants and generate distinct outcomes. The analysis underlines the need to specify the findings in the literature: that the causes and consequences of corruption relate more to ‘perceived’ corruption rather than actual corruption.     

PERSUASION AS GOVERNANCE: A STATE‐CENTRIC RELATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Debates about governance and the relationship between governance and government have focused upon markets, hierarchies and networks as principal modes of governance. In this paper we argue that persuasion constitutes a further and distinctive mode of governance, albeit one which interpenetrates other modes of governance. In order to assess the nature, limitations and scope of persuasion and the complex relationships between markets, hierarchies, networks on the one hand and persuasion on the other, we interpret persuasion through the prism of two theoretical perspectives on governance. We argue that the society‐centred perspective usefully draws our attention to the role played by non‐state actors in the exercise of governance through persuasion but that a state‐centric relational account can help us to better understand important facets of persuasion as a mode of governance.     

PUBLIC SERVICE MODERNIZATION AND TRADE UNION REFORM: TOWARDS MANAGERIAL LED RENEWAL?

It is a curious feature of the debate about the UK Labour government’s modernization agenda that the consequences for trade unions have been almost wholly neglected. Focusing on a case study of UNISON, the public service trade union that is dominant in local government and health, this paper argues that UNISON has emulated key aspects of the modernization agenda, adopting a dual strategy to union renewal. It has attempted to rebuild workplace organization, but has placed strong emphasis on managerial‐led renewal, adopting many components of the target culture. These measures have created tensions within the organization that mirror some of the broader contradictions of the modernization agenda. The paper concludes by considering the implications of these findings for public service union renewal.